• Home
• News
• About
• Searching and Browsing
  • Find a Location
  • Find a Feature
  • Find a Word
  • Browse
  • Progress Status
• Resources
• Contact Us

I Location

II General Description

Parish church built of limestone rubble of which only the E gable and N and S returns remain.

III Exterior Features

2. Windows

(i) E windows

Three sharply pointed arches with a deep splay. The two outer arches have an architrave formed by a deep hollow flanked on either side by a roll. The arch of the central opening is decorated with a series of lozenges set into a deep hollow. Each lozenge is filled with a pyramidal form straddled by a narrow transverse roll. The jambs of the windows are articulated on the face by narrow shafts surmounted by capitals. The capitals are now quite worn, but were probably carved with foliage and possibly human masks?

3. Exterior Decoration

d. Miscellaneous

(i) Head

N side of N window (now almost obscured by ivy): ?male head with pointed chin and down-turned mouth carved in quite high relief. The point of the nose and top of the head have been destroyed. the head has large deeply-hollowed ears, below which are two large deeply-carved concentric circles representing locks of hair.

(ii) Head

S side of N window (top): worn head, oval in outline with protrusive upper lip and high 'bobbed' hair. No ears visible.

(iii) Head

S side N window ( middle: worn head, pointed chin, protrusive upper lip. The N side of the stone is broken, only the top of the ear on the S side is visible. No hair apparent.

(iv) Head

S side N window (bottom): head with down-turned mouth, broken nose and round eyes. The top of the head is quite worn, locks of hair extend about half way down the sides of the face.

(v) Head

S side central window: best preserved head with a cap and locks of long hair, extending down to the base of a pointed chin. The nose is broken and brow furrowed. Against the left cheek have been carved the fingers and thumb of a right hand, suggesting a thoughtful attitude.

(vi) - (xiii) Fragments

Stones in variously damaged states carved with lozenges similar to those of (i) - (v) framing hacked projections which may once have been heads.

(xiv) - (xvi)

Blocks with the remains of diagonally placed bands which may have been lozenges as 1-13 but are now too damaged to tell with any certainty.

(xvii)

Close to the apex of the N side of the N window is a piece of stone with five broad pellets along one side, this was probably part of an abacus (c.f. Liathmore, Co. Tipperary).

(xviii)

Block carved with chevron motif

(xix)

On the E face of the gable a block carved with a triangular form and narrow band to one side. Scattered throughout the fabric of the wall above the windows are a further five? pieces of sandstone carved with lozenges of similar size and profile to those surrounding the carved heads. The centres of all of the lozenges are quite flat, although not tool worked, suggesting that heads might once have appeared within them but were perhaps destroyed when the material was reused.

VII History

A letter of c.1211 suggests that by that date the Premonstratensian Abbey at Tuam had been in existence for some years. The exact date of its foundation is unknown, although it has been attributed to William de Burgo, in c.1203-4. In 1244 Tuam ‘and all its churches’ were burnt. The Abbey and its possessions were leased to Thomas Lewes in 1574 and four years later were granted to the Burgesses and commonalty of Athenry (Gwynn and Hadcock, 1970, 207).

VIII Comments/Opinions

The positioning of the re-used fragments suggests that their insertion into the wall is coeval with the construction of the E gable. The mouldings on the windows suggest a date of c.1230, and it seems likely that the stones were inserted into the fabric at this early stage. The carving of the heads find their closest parallels at Dysart O' Dea and Clonfert, suggesting a date of c.1170-80. Although no arc is now discernible in the stones, the most likely function of the head carved stones was as part of an arch as at Dysart O'Dea. It is possible that the stones may have come from the nearby cathedral which ‘fell’ in 1184, although it is known that a number of other churches existed in Tuam during the 12thc., so that the stones could have come from any one of them.

IX Bibliography